Tough love! Modi’s raising Balochistan doesnt mean he has abandoned hopes of a historic peace

[Joe Shearer]

The level of moral decay in J&K politics is beyond our comprehension, I highly doubt 370 will go away in our lifetime.

Be that as it may, Mehbooba Mufti has won my admiration and respect. If she had resigned, then the popular focus would have been entirely anti-Indian. It took guts to stay on and to try to handle the problem. Unfortunately, her ground level party workers are paying the price. A very heavy price.

 

[waz]

Tough love: Modi’s raising Balochistan does not mean he has abandoned hopes of a historic peace with Pakistan
August 16, 2016, 2:00 am IST Sreeram Sundar Chaulia in TOI Edit Page | Edit Page, India | TOI

Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s open acknowledgement during the marquee occasion of Independence Day that he is receiving communications and wishes from the people of Balochistan, Gilgit and Pakistan-occupied-Kashmir (Azad Kashmir) is a combative policy shift based on the logic that public counterattack is the best defence.

It reflects a core nationalistic position in India that the latest prolonged spell of disturbances in the Indian-administered Kashmir Valley is linked to deliberate instigation by the Pakistani state. By mentioning three regions inside Pakistan that have active grievances and separatist movements, Modi is effectively turning the tables and sending a warning to Islamabad that New Delhi can unleash tit-for-tat manoeuvres.

The more Pakistan campaigns internationally for the ‘freedom struggle’ in Kashmir Valley and acts as a self-appointed guardian of the rights of Kashmiris under so-called ‘Indian imperialism’, the greater the Indian Prime Minister’s resolve to put the ball back in the Pakistani court.

A definite new regional policy is on the anvil. This is revealed by Modi’s declaration on August 12 that “Part of kashmir under Pak is ours.” He added that his government would “take initiatives to develop contact with citizens of Azad Kashmir settled abroad” and also bring human rights violations in Balochistan to global attention. His remark that Pakistan was “killing its own people by fighter jets” and that it had no business preaching independence for Kashmir signifies that India will now purposefully escalate the costs of Pakistan-sponsored terrorism and unrest in Kashmir Valley.

What the Indian Prime Minister did in a primetime national address on Independence Day is to drop hints of a pushback policy that may have numerous levers ranging from overt to covert. For years, Pakistan has been accusing India of fomenting insurgents in Balochistan via Afghanistan and Iran. India has plausibly denied involvement in the affairs of this restive western province of Pakistan, where a secular and resilient guerrilla rebellion has been raging on grounds of unfair exploitation of gas wealth and ethnic discrimination against minority tribes.

The scorched-earth counter-insurgency by the Pakistani army in Balochistan has killed tens of thousands of people in a “secret dirty war” with hardly any neutral witnesses or media presence permitted in the arid mountainous region. The degree of suppression of Baloch voices has drawn comparisons to the genocidal war waged by the Pakistani military against Bengali-speaking people of erstwhile East Pakistan in 1971.

While the level of the popular anger and secessionism in Gilgit and Azad Kashmir is not as intense as in Balochistan, these territories which used to be part of undivided Jammu & Kashmir before 1947 do seethe against their absence of autonomy and the second-class treatment they receive from Pakistan’s Punjabi elites who have repeatedly failed to win the trust of minorities.

To observe closely and to factor into strategy the alienation and resentment that the people of Balochistan, Gilgit and Azad Kashmir nurse toward Islamabad is natural for Modi, who aims to integrate Kashmir Valley fully into the national mainstream by elbowing out Pakistani interference. It is a geopolitical imperative to hold a card against a neighbouring country which is not altering its hostile behaviour.

Modi is not a militaristic hawk who revels in triggering a vicious cycle of insurgencies that could dismember Pakistan. His basic instinct is still liberal and he hopes that Pakistan will eventually join him in his mission to integrate South Asia for economic cooperation and shared prosperity. In the first two years of his reign, he staked a lot of his personal capital and tried to talk economic interdependence and initiate dialogue with his Pakistani counterpart, Nawaz Sharif.

But sadly, as the captured Pakistani terrorist Bahadur Ali recently confessed, the deep state of the Pakistani military-intelligence complex has reactivated its proxies to “take advantage of” the tensions in Kashmir Valley and restart the full-scale ‘freedom movement’ of the 1990s. Sensing this danger, Modi’s statecraft is shifting gear to squeeze Pakistan into a corner until it realises its folly.

Modi’s fervent desire to “turn the course of history” with Pakistan remains a noble one, but the path to that optimistic turn may be paved by the dark passage of tough love.



@Star Wars @Butchcassidy @kaykay @hellfire @anant_s




***********************************
My opinion:
Brace up Pakistan! If you can do it, we can do it too. You bring up Kashmir and we will add fuel to Balochistan issue- this is exactly what Modi meant, may be in more brusque words.
His reaction should not be a surprise to many, as this was in the offing. Pakistan's response to the attacks on our base, its reaction to the small scale violence in the valley, snubbing our HM during the SAARC meeting- it was asking for this kinda reaction.
Pakistan is at the verge of getting a new COAS, and going by Pakistan's history army has always maintained a control over the democratically elected government. Whoever the new COAS be, war is unlikely since Pakistan is in the process of weeding out "bad" terrorists.
So it has 2 options, one is to stop "showing" support to the rogue elements within India and accept the offer of peace. Two,get ready to face the music at all the international level conferences. Let me add, terror attacks around the world have only added to Pakistan's woes. Before it buckles under the international pressure, Pakistan should take up the first option and cooperate.
Peace!

Some things to ponder upon.
1.He's around 40 years too late. Back in the early 70's there were real problems in the region that India could have exploited, that window of opportunity has now gone.
2. Baluch youth have signed up in large numbers to the regular army, this in part due to economic stagnation in the region. There are around 30,000 in the regular army, with another 7,000 being trained.
3. The youth have left the region in large numbers, migrating to Pakistan's biggest cities for further education and work. They now spearhead efforts to finish off the feudal system, which was the focal point for the rebellion. It did not take them too long to figure out that they were getting the short end of the stick. The sardars sent their own children to the US, UK and Germany to be educated and upon their return had them driving 4 x 4's and owning large tracts of land, where the families of the students were "indebted" to them. If they dared venture out, to sample life outside the region, they were told it was a Punjabi conspiracy, and if they insisted, some gentle coercion with AK-47 rounds to the head,
would nudge them in the correct direction.
4. Population, the region is very mixed with a Pakhtun population making up around 40% of the overall people and Baluch and Brahui speakers making up 60% (20% are Barhui), which mutes nationalist fever, as in nationalists who are opposed to Pakistan find it very hard now to gain a sympathetic voice. The Baloch want to live in peace with their fellow countrymen, without the poison of the anti-Pakistan groups, who have in the past tried to start ethnic conflicts, which would be a disaster for all.
5. It's support base outside Pakistan has dwindled to practically nothing. For example a rally in Germany where a sizeable Baluch population resides, only brought out 12 people....Last year also saw the capitulation of the largest Baluch independence organisation in the US, as their leader said they will work with Pakistan now.
6. The insurgency proper has dwindled to what can be described as a puddle. Successful attacks are unheard of, hundreds of fighters have given up their arms, and so forth.

 

[Joe Shearer]

I agree that Kargil was not a good move. I think it was Musharraf's personal vendetta for 1971 and 1984 (Siachen), bypassing even some senior commanders. But India has not always been 'for peace' as much as most Indians would like to believe and for the world to believe.

Look at this image? See the date and the timing? The article even mentions that Indians accused the besieged and outgunned state of Hyderabad Deccan of attacking Indian villages! Must have learned from Hitler's 'counter attack' on the Poles on 1 September 1939!

I respect your posts, but must correct you on this one.

The 'besieged and outgunned' state of Hyderabad didn't think it was besieged and outgunned. It formed its own band of armed militants who created havoc, and, like certain great leaders mentioned in earlier posts here, never thought of the consequences.

The Razakars caused an enormous problem within Hyderabad, to the extent where the Nawab of Chhatri refused to continue as the PM. They were on the rampage, and their killings were based on a state of hubris where Qasim Rizvi talked of dipping the feet of their steeds in the Bay of Bengal. It was bad enough to consider what they were doing within the state (mind you, it was not the regulars, but these communal para-militaries), but they actually lost their fears of the after math to the extent that villages on the Andhra border were attacked.

You are right in stating that this was not the real cause of the 'police action', but not right in suggesting that these were fictitious.

Bad attempt at that. The Balochistan issue will only make things escalate, a better approach would be to push for sanctions on Pakistan for supporting terror or something.

I would have preferred that.

But that approach belongs to the bygone era of Indian diplomacy. Foreign policy is now made by various coteries, including a highly dubious NSA.

@Levina there is more to it. Read movement of Russian bombers to Iran. Will tag you there. Work up and analyse past weeks moves.

I think that is a different ball-game. Russia's attention is overwhelmingly on eastern Europe, where she hates the Ukrainians, and is getting belligerent with western European expansion; on Turkey, and on insisting on a properly respectful stance by the Turkish state, and non-interference with Russian aims in Syria; on Iran, and getting cosy with Iran; on China, and extracting as much as is possible from China, and fighting the reverse engineering of the Chinese from inside the tent, not outside; treating the US, in general, with disdain and contempt, and generally thinking European and borderlands, not global any more.

But let us see.

 

[Soumitra]

I would have preferred that.

But that approach belongs to the bygone era of Indian diplomacy. Foreign policy is now made by various coteries, including a highly dubious NSA.

That bygone era of diplomacy produced no results.Please see my post #49 to know why we are here at this point

 

[Joe Shearer]

Totally in agreement with the above statement. Unfortunately, this pragmatic approach did not yield the dividends which could have been reaped had an everlasting peace been signed between the two nations while Musharraf was in power in Pakistan and a seemingly Hindu Nationalist Government was in power in India (I use seemingly as Vajpayee was, perhaps, the most moderate of Prime Ministers of India; strictly my opinion here). The subsequent oft talked about agreement was a brainchild of this period of Indo-Pak relations, but the loss at elections of BJP was another incident of 'lost opportunity' in a long series of opportunities.

The flip side of the issue has been that over the decades this willingness of Indians to 'manage' the International Affairs and specifically Indo-Pak relations, has imparted an impression of 'weakness' and 'ineptitude' upon the masses, something that is disturbingly highlighted by the comments which can be seen on this very forum by members of either side of the border.

Very adroitly put, sir. There is no disputing the fact that the aura of Modi as a 'can do man' coupled to steady economic growth of the nation, is a case study fit for 'marketing' studies. However, what he has been able to achieve is a sympathetic view to Indian viewpoint in a number of nations, building upon the very foundations of the decades of diplomacy as you have highlighted above, and coupled it to the economic and market potential of India while stressing Democratic values, in short, he has been striking the right chords at the right time.

The position of Indian Government is going to harden further. The recent spate of violence in Kashmir, and the subsequent statements emanating from Pakistan with Nawaz Sharif's hailing Wani as a hero, was a serious blunder on the part of GoP. A more matured and rational approach to the present issue could have been adopted by the GoP in order to maximise the political gains they could have achieved from this incident. My immediate reaction on killing of Burhan Wani was to wonder openly (and I shared it with @Joe Shearer) why he had to be killed now, when he could have been killed anytime in the past few years?

The line is fast approaching. I do not foresee any pull back from crossing our own threshold until something substantial is conceded by the Pakistani Establishment, a possibility, which is remote. I fear, that if the violence continues in Kashmir for another month, we both, as nations, may be on a path which may only result in more pain and suffering.




I do too. However, I am looking at the situation keeping in mind the apparent inactivity of US in Ukraine, increasing convergence of efforts by US and Russia in Syria, the South China Sea judgement and its fallout and of course CPEC, it's impact and Indo-Pak-Afghan-Iran equation in the region.



Very true sir. The history of nation states is replete with instances which emphasise the veracity of the same. What one would call, the cyclic trend.

It is yet to start sir. Will take some time. Will keep in mind what you have pointed out.

Thanks

I believe that the point is that Modi is striking a completely different set of chords. This is not Indian diplomacy, this is Modi selling Gujarat Mark 2. It isn't what Indian PMs used to do, perhaps wrongly; it's what CMs used to do. Somehow I think that this new, belligerent approach will create problems; Pakistani diplomats are neither deep-thinking enough nor influential enough to carve out a different strategy to respond to this, and the charting of courses on rapidly-converging paths risks creating an explosive situation.

 

[SrNair]

Modi wouldnt issue a statements without any well created plan.He said it because he meant it .And if he meant it then it means he was already looking for an excuse and Pakistan just gave one.

 

[Spectre]

That bygone era of diplomacy produced no results.Please see my post #49 to know why we are here at this point

Not true. It had it's merits. We held off both the soviets and US - as much as we could. Diplomacy kept us out of relative isolation akin to China even when we were in opposition of US interests. Diplomacy maintained our relationship with Arab World which bought us invaluable FOREX. Diplomacy kept Iran Neutral giving us significant toehold in Muslim World. Diplomacy got the support of Soviets with Kept US neutered in security council.

There is much to criticize but so much to applaud also

 

[Soumitra]

So now we fight?

How many of us here, will actually be missing temporarily and permanently in and after that period?

Who said anything about a fight. There is a saying in hindi "Jab ghee seedhi ungli se na nikale to ungli tedhi karni padti hai"

We dont need to start a war. We can just raise balochistan isue at all international forums. Unlike Pakistan we dont have any desire to absorb Baluchistan into our country. But we can continue to raise the human rights issue. Fortunatley for us our capital in the world is much better than Pakistan. Our diplomats are much more skilled. A country which can have good relations with both Arab nations and Israel, a country which has consistently won against Pakistan in various international dispute tribunals. We can use our diplomatic clout and abilities to put pressure on Pakistan.

If Pakistan implodes good for us. The main goal will be to keep pakistan busy in solving their own problems.

If push comes to shove we can also give some much needed "moral support" to the balochis

 

[SrNair]

I believe that the point is that Modi is striking a completely different set of chords. This is not Indian diplomacy, this is Modi selling Gujarat Mark 2. It isn't what Indian PMs used to do, perhaps wrongly; it's what CMs used to do. Somehow I think that this new, belligerent approach will create problems; Pakistani diplomats are neither deep-thinking enough nor influential enough to carve out a different strategy to respond to this, and the charting of courses on rapidly-converging paths risks creating an explosive situation.

Modi is just at the top of command center ,we have several others that formulate these policies right under him including NSA

 

[Soumitra]

Not true. It had it's merits. We held off both the soviets and US - as much as we could. Diplomacy kept us out of relative isolation akin to China even when we were in opposition of US interests. Diplomacy maintained our relationship with Arab World which bought us invaluable FOREX. Diplomacy kept Iran Neutral giving us significant toehold in Muslim World. Diplomacy got the support of Soviets with Kept US neutered in security council.

There is much to criticize but so much to applaud also

I am NOT saying all diplomacy was wrong. I know that diplomacy has given us lot of dividends. This is clear from my previous post.

My contention is previous style of dilplomacy has not managed to solve the Pakistan problem. We have had upper hand many times but we could never give it the final push. It is akin to our athletes working very hard but falling at the last level.

It is time we try the pondrunova vault

 

[T90TankGuy]

Improvement starts with "I".
Why majority of Indians found there self always on a Pakistani Defense Forum? more then their own forums? Why?

you realize that this is an international forum? also if we weren't here this forum would have very less traffic.

 

[Star Wars]

Modi is just at the top of command center ,we have several others that formulate these policies right under him including NSA

The govt. starts and ends with Modi according 90% of the analysts here...

 

[Joe Shearer]

Modi is just at the top of command center ,we have several others that formulate these policies right under him including NSA

It is the quality of those levels that scares me.

you realize that this is an international forum? also if we weren't here this forum would have very less traffic.

What are you DOING?

Trace his previous posts. This is a one-trick pony, much like that other 'King' character. Nothing to say for years on end, suddenly come to life to say that this is a Pakistani forum and why are Indians here, and then go back to slumberland.

 

[T90TankGuy]

It is the quality of those levels that scares me.



What are you DOING?

Trace his previous posts. This is a one-trick pony, much like that other 'King' character. Nothing to say for years on end, suddenly come to life to say that this is a Pakistani forum and why are Indians here, and then go back to slumberland.

You mean his other ID

 

[Joe Shearer]

You mean his other ID

What's his other ID? You've got me on this one.